Reply With Quote
Jeannie Buss toe tapped him into taking that job. Had nothing to do with that boy.
Was this before OR after he came back beggin' for his job?
tee, hee.
Jeannie Buss toe tapped him into taking that job. Had nothing to do with that boy.
Giuseppe uses the word "job", paradox!
Obsessed.
except they all had their longest playoff runs during their primePlayers who've had long careers, their lower numbers toward the end bringing down the overall average. You understand the concept of aging, don't you?
20th
This mad hater who posts on Kobe 24/7
When you have dedicated haters like this, you know you're doing something right
Again, career PER is improper usage of the statistic..
It's a flawed method of interpreting PER..
Are you in' re ed? I'm not referring to a single playoff run. I'm talking about the overall career average, which would be brought down by said player's last few years when they posted much lower numbers (see Bird's last 3 years or Kareem's or Hakeem's).except they all had their longest playoff runs during their prime
This mad hater who posts on Kobe 24/7
When you have dedicated haters like this, you know you're doing something right
Do me a favor and post Kareem's PER playoff average before 1983 (when he was still considered the "man.")
If you do consider a player's later seasons in his career, should you also not consider Kobe's first 3 seasons (even arguably his 4th season) in the league when he wasn't a starter and/or a primary option on the team? Kobe's first 2-3 seasons in the league are equivalent to a declining player at the end of his career because Kobe wasn't given the minutes and touches an elite player would get in those first few years.
Kobe vs Larry in their prime
best 5 Playoff PER years
Kobe
26.8
25.0
25.0
24.7
24.1
Bird
26.3
23.9
21.8
20.9
20.7
according to PER, Kobe > Bird
Harlem is correct here.
How so when the league average is set at 15 across all eras? One of the novel things about PER is that it lets us compare players across eras who played at different paces. I know the impression a lot of posters have of me is that I'm a fanboy of the stat, but I find it utterly useless comparing per game stats when a player's statistical output (or lackthereof) is often very dependent on the system they play under.
Currently it's the only catchall stat that adjusts for pace.
Problem?
Some, even many, would take Kobe over Bird. So what does this prove?
Brutal win ..... up big and gave it away. Great finish by Bryant. Jam Stone is right on point. People run up in here with their assholes leaking. Fix that before someone slips and fall on the wet spots .........
Lakers still need to fix that offense because this only giving up 90 or 84 points to win by 2 or lose by 6 is bull .
We can eliminate his first 2 seasons. By his 3rd, though, he was clearly the Lakers second best player. Averaged 20, 7, 5 in the '99 playoffs. So to throw that season out because he "wasn't a starter," would be intellectually dishonest.
what is your top 10 alltime midnight...lmao this gonna be good
Kobe's not in it.
Why is that humorous?
You live in a cave?
Kobe's made top 10 a while ago
post your top 10, you're a basketball genius
I only see maybe two point guards in the top ten: Johnson and Robertson
Two shooting guards: Jordan and Bryant
One small forward: Bird
One Power Forward: Duncan
The rest centers: Russell, Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabbar, O'Neal and Olajuwon
Thats more or less the top ten with one player being left out...........
Jordan
Kareem
Magic
Bird
Russel
Wilt
Shaq
Duncan
Olajuwon
Robertson
Why is Robertson over Kobe?
Kobe is a fringe top 10 player IMO. That's not Kobe hate, but he's not locked in like a Duncan/Jordan/Shaq/Magic...I don't have him in there, but I wouldn't argue too much if someone had him at 9 or 10.
How is Duncan locked in, but Kobe isn't
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions